Chat Bot

I have noticed that recently some threads have been copied almost completely one to one and opened as new ones by other people?

Thank you, Cassandro for letting us know. Otherwise, I would be replying to them. I already replied to one.

Why is that?

It does not make any sense.

Why would people do that?

California said:

Why is that?

It does not make any sense.

Why would people do that?

see if you can think of a possible reason which results in money for the person doing it?

I cannot think of any possible reason which results in money for the person doing it.

Am I stupid?

Concerning that last Post with the four quotes, there...

Thanks, DongFeng5 for the reply. I tried about 5 times to edit this Post, to erase the Quotes to shorten it... but I cannot! Another thing to note, maybe: always leave spaces between multiple Quotes...?

:-/

Never mind, it wouldn't work for long anyway. All the bot author has to do is add an extra space between two of the words in the pasted content, and the hash value will be something different, defeating the check. The NAS would have to look at this class of software instead:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism_detection

That's a better fit for the problem at hand, and should give a score on how similar a new thread submission or reply is to an existing one that could have been automatically mined by some executable code.

DongFeng5 said:

1. The NAS create their own daemon to peruse each thread OP and subsequent reply on the site, generating hashes of the bits which are NOT a quote of other users' content, then they store them in a SEPARATE database.

DongFeng5 said:

2. When a new thread or reply is created, it initially goes into a holding area where the NAS automated tools can scrutinise it but the rest of us can't yet see it.

DongFeng5 said:

3. An automated tool calculates a hash of the new content, then compares it against the existing database of hashes, resolving collisions as required.

DongFeng5 said:

4. Any content where a duplicate is being submitted will be flagged for human moderator approval, alongside a copy of the original content which hashed to the same value.

...The "Quote"function does not always work correctly, and so I had to quote four times in order to re-quote all of that. I do so in the hope (...) that NAS (WebPM, probably) notices it and reads it.

DongFeng5 said:

1. The NAS create their own daemon to peruse each thread OP and subsequent reply on the site, generating hashes of the bits which are NOT a quote of other users' content, then they store them in a SEPARATE database.

DongFeng5 said:

2. When a new thread or reply is created, it initially goes into a holding area where the NAS automated tools can scrutinise it but the rest of us can't yet see it.

DongFeng5 said:

3. An automated tool calculates a hash of the new content, then compares it against the existing database of hashes, resolving collisions as required.

DongFeng5 said:

4. Any content where a duplicate is being submitted will be flagged for human moderator approval, alongside a copy of the original content which hashed to the same value.

...The "Quote"function does not always work correctly, and so I had to quote four times in order to re-quote all of that. I do so in the hope (...) that NAS (WebPM, probably) notices it and reads it.

Concerning that last Post with the four quotes, there...

Thanks, DongFeng5 for the reply. I tried about 5 times to edit this Post, to erase the Quotes to shorten it... but I cannot! Another thing to note, maybe: always leave spaces between multiple Quotes...?

:-/

Never mind, it wouldn't work for long anyway. All the bot author has to do is add an extra space between two of the words in the pasted content, and the hash value will be something different, defeating the check. The NAS would have to look at this class of software instead:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism_detection

That's a better fit for the problem at hand, and should give a score on how similar a new thread submission or reply is to an existing one that could have been automatically mined by some executable code.